I define "outside the core" as "anything that isn't
packaged with Perl itself". Things you'd define as
"part of the language." I/O stuff, threading stuff,
standard types, builtin functions, etc. And yeah,
most of that stuff will be written natively in C,
PIR, or be part of parrot itself.
I thi
On Thu, 2004-07-22 at 19:21, JOSEPH RYAN wrote:
> Well, that's what all of the ruckus is about.
> There is a strong leaning towards including *no*
> builtin modules with the core. So, that leaves only
> the builtin functions and classes as "the core", and
> so what is "in core" becomes a prett
On Fri, 23 Jul 2004, Luke Palmer wrote:
> Well, Perl 6 is coming with one of those as a builtin, called C
> (see List::Util). But you can't quite use a shorthand syntax like
> yours. You have to say either:
Cool, that's what I wanted to know. Taking into account both this
circumstance and the
On Fri, 23 Jul 2004, Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon wrote:
> Those blocks would be a syntax error; the appropriate way to do that
> would be to refer to the operator by its proper name:
>
> my $tot = fold 0, &infix:+, 1..10;
Well, I suspected that. The matter is I still know too few concretely
On Thu, 22 Jul 2004, Luke Palmer wrote:
> And adding to that the definition of a unary hyper operator:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] == map { Â$_ } @list
>
> It seems that the rand problem could be solved this way:
>
> my @nums = rand (100 xx 100);
Huh?!? While not so bad (apart the unicode o
Michele Dondi writes:
> Quite similarly, for example, I'd like to have a fold() function like the
> one that is available in many functional programming languages, a la:
>
> my $tot = fold 0, { + }, 1..10; # 55
> my $fact = fold 1, { * }, 2..5; # 120
>
> (i.e. please DO NOT point out that th
Michele Dondi wrote:
Quite similarly, for example, I'd like to have a fold() function like the
one that is available in many functional programming languages, a la:
my $tot = fold 0, { + }, 1..10; # 55
my $fact = fold 1, { * }, 2..5; # 120
Those blocks would be a syntax error; the appropriate
On Thu, 22 Jul 2004, JOSEPH RYAN wrote:
> When I think about your description of xxx, I
> summarized it in my head as "Call a coderef a certain
> number of times, and then collect the results."
> That's pretty much what map is, except that xxx is
> infix and map is prefix.
>
> @results =
